Gyrfalcon:Maul555: Discretion copper... discretion. Look it up and use it you farking jackass!

And yet, when cops do exercise discretion and let someone go, people like you are often screaming how wrong it is for cops to show favoritism and let "certain people" go because they're other cops, or politicians or whatever.

What you mean is, Cops should let nice, poor or people YOU think are "innocent" go, and only arrest other cops, mean people, or those whom you think OUGHT to go to jail because you don't like them much.

To put this in perspective, if this woman had been a cop, arrested for ignoring an outstanding traffic warrant, you'd be cheering because finally the farking jackass got what he deserved for once. No discretion for him, nosir.

wow you are a huge troll... I am putting you on ignore for obvious reasons.

A Black Forest woman who was standing outside her uninsured, destroyed mobile home was handcuffed and arrested by El Paso County Sheriff's deputies Friday afternoon on a warrant stemming from a traffic-related charge.

I don't understand the point of pointing out that she was black. That's kinda racist.

HideAndGoFarkYourself:I don't make the policies, and whether or not I agree with them, I'm required to abide by them. She could have easily avoided having a warrant out for her arrest by taking care of whatever the charge was that caused the warrant to be issued in the first place.

It's quite possible to end up with a bench warrant with no opportunity to appear and avoid it.

I found out I'd received a parking ticket once when I was registering my car. Normally, they'd leave a ticket on your vehicle and mail a copy, but I received neither. I'm pretty sure it didn't turn into a warrant, but easily could have if my registration were due a few months later.

RoyBatty:HideAndGoFarkYourself: RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: I have little sympathy. On one hand, it sucks about her house. But one had nothing to do with the other.

If I stop a person and it's an extraditable warrant, I'm required by our department policy to arrest that person, unless they have a medical condition which would prevent them from safely making it to the jail. So, unless the person is having a heart attack, they go to jail.

Her hard luck story about her house being destroyed isn't worth me losing my career and livelihood over.

The department policy is an ass. Don't be an ass yourself.

People sifting through the remains of their homes have more pressing issues than sucking your dick over a misdemeanor traffic warrant. After you arrest her, are you going to back and secure her belongings and make sure no one rips them off?

Classy.

I don't make the policies, and whether or not I agree with them, I'm required to abide by them. She could have easily avoided having a warrant out for her arrest by taking care of whatever the charge was that caused the warrant to be issued in the first place.

Like I said, and like I'll stand by, it's not worth losing my career over, so she would have gone to jail.

Sorry you dislike that. That's how we plebeians see it when you choose to do something you know is wrong but will only result in a boot stomping on our face.

So tell me, you come across a person sifting through the ashes of their home picking out what can be saved.

You arrest them on a traffic warrant.

What will you do to secure their belongings?

First off, I don't "know it's wrong." She failed to show up for a court appearance she knew she had. She made a conscious decision to skirt the law, and ended up with a warrant. Warrants have to be served. Period. You THINK it's wrong, and that's your right.

It's not the responsibility of the police to secure the belongings of people who suffer from acts of god. If the police kick in a door to serve a warrant, they are sometimes required to take steps to secure the residence in that type of situation. But there is no legal obligation to secure their property after an act of god.

Tell me how you secure a house that has been decimated by a wildfire anyway...

fnordfocus:HideAndGoFarkYourself: I don't make the policies, and whether or not I agree with them, I'm required to abide by them. She could have easily avoided having a warrant out for her arrest by taking care of whatever the charge was that caused the warrant to be issued in the first place.

It's quite possible to end up with a bench warrant with no opportunity to appear and avoid it.

I found out I'd received a parking ticket once when I was registering my car. Normally, they'd leave a ticket on your vehicle and mail a copy, but I received neither. I'm pretty sure it didn't turn into a warrant, but easily could have if my registration were due a few months later.

Outstanding parking tickets don't get you arrrested. This would have to have been a moving violation or expired license/failure to carry insurance. In order to get out of those, you register your vehicle/show up with insurance papers and you're free to go.

Harvey Manfrenjensenjen:ThatGuyGreg: Yeah, shiatty timing, but maybe she should pay that ticket or show up to fight it next time, hmmm?

basemetal: Meh, if I fail to appear in court, they'll issue a warrant for my arrest too. Show up, pay your fine, or stand before the man, don't just blow it off.

Or maybe they could refrain from arresting people over something like that in the first place. If the person doesn't show up to traffic court, just render a guilty verdict and assess the ticket cost plus something extra for wasting the court's time. Send the bill and/or have her pony up the next time she registers her vehicle. I guaranfarkingtee you that the arrest and processing is going to cost far more than whatever she owed to begin with. Plus she now gets lodging and health care on the taxpayer's dime (to be fair, though, the latter was likely to happen anyway).

Not my rules, they are the rules of the place we live. You know the rules. you know the consequences.

barc0001:ThatGuyGreg: Yeah, shiatty timing, but maybe she should pay that ticket or show up to fight it next time, hmmm?

What the hell is it with the US and their fetish to lock people up for anything possible? I don't know if it's even POSSIBLE to be arrested in Canada for an outstanding traffic ticket, I sure has hell have never heard of it happening. We just let the bureaucrats handle it. You don't pay a ticket? Good luck renewing your insurance. Drive your car without insurance? You'll get pulled over by the cops, given another ticket and your car towed, then left on the side of the road with plenty of time to figure out how you're going to get the scratch to pay for your tickets, insurance and impound fees as you continue your journey on foot.

Simple, effective, and nobody needs to go to jail. What the hell, USA?

So very much THIS!

I got a speeding ticket in quebec in 2004 when I was driving to alberta to live there. I've never paid it, lost a cpl points off my license which by now will be back on there, and never heard any more about it. And i've had my name run recently in New Brunswick and nothing came up either.

RoyBatty:HideAndGoFarkYourself: Tell me how you secure a house that has been decimated by a wildfire anyway...

Exactly, which is why carting her off immediately is such an asinine power play.

It's not a "power play." You're intentionally choosing to see this as something that it isn't. Police officers have an obligation to arrest someone who has an active warrant issued by the court. There is no leeway. We have to arrest.

On top of that, every name and tag you run is logged on the computer. We are subject to audit from the state and federal agencies that provide us with state and NCIC access. They can audit those records and we have to explain why we decided to violate a court order and let someone with a warrant go.

ThatGuyGreg:Yeah, shiatty timing, but maybe she should pay that ticket or show up to fight it next time, hmmm?

My very reaction. Cops went to her address and picked her up on an outstanding warrant. The fact that her address was a destroyed trailer is irrelevant to the discussion. She doesn't get a mulligan because her trailer was destroyed.

Maul555:Gyrfalcon: Maul555: Discretion copper... discretion. Look it up and use it you farking jackass!

And yet, when cops do exercise discretion and let someone go, people like you are often screaming how wrong it is for cops to show favoritism and let "certain people" go because they're other cops, or politicians or whatever.

What you mean is, Cops should let nice, poor or people YOU think are "innocent" go, and only arrest other cops, mean people, or those whom you think OUGHT to go to jail because you don't like them much.

To put this in perspective, if this woman had been a cop, arrested for ignoring an outstanding traffic warrant, you'd be cheering because finally the farking jackass got what he deserved for once. No discretion for him, nosir.

wow you are a huge troll... I am putting you on ignore for obvious reasons.

Dog Man:RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Tell me how you secure a house that has been decimated by a wildfire anyway...

Exactly, which is why carting her off immediately is such an asinine power play.

It's not a "power play." You're intentionally choosing to see this as something that it isn't. Police officers have an obligation to arrest someone who has an active warrant issued by the court. There is no leeway. We have to arrest.

On top of that, every name and tag you run is logged on the computer. We are subject to audit from the state and federal agencies that provide us with state and NCIC access. They can audit those records and we have to explain why we decided to violate a court order and let someone with a warrant go.

I think I do understand to some extent the truly difficult position you would be in. With judge and pension on one side, and newly homeless individual on the other it's pretty clear you're up against (a rock and a hard place) versus a newly homeless individual with no power.

That said, I've certainly read of incidents where it's been handled better than immediately carting off the victim of the fire.

So when I say, how do you secure her belongings, one answer might be, call the sergeant and her relatives/friends and give her a couple of hours or half a day with a cop onsite. Then he/or she is released as quickly as possible and brought back.

Or call the judge or a different judge and ask for a waiver.

Or call the Red Cross and see if they can rustle up some volunteers.

And no, I don't know how realistic any of that is in *your town*, but where I want to live, cops use discretion, prosecutors use discretion, and newly homeless victims of fire aren't arrested over a ticket and taken away from the ruins of their home.

dopekitty74:barc0001: ThatGuyGreg: Yeah, shiatty timing, but maybe she should pay that ticket or show up to fight it next time, hmmm?

What the hell is it with the US and their fetish to lock people up for anything possible? I don't know if it's even POSSIBLE to be arrested in Canada for an outstanding traffic ticket, I sure has hell have never heard of it happening. We just let the bureaucrats handle it. You don't pay a ticket? Good luck renewing your insurance. Drive your car without insurance? You'll get pulled over by the cops, given another ticket and your car towed, then left on the side of the road with plenty of time to figure out how you're going to get the scratch to pay for your tickets, insurance and impound fees as you continue your journey on foot.

Simple, effective, and nobody needs to go to jail. What the hell, USA?

So very much THIS!

I got a speeding ticket in quebec in 2004 when I was driving to alberta to live there. I've never paid it, lost a cpl points off my license which by now will be back on there, and never heard any more about it. And i've had my name run recently in New Brunswick and nothing came up either.

don't get stopped again in Quebec until you do, or they'll probably impound your car, unless they've abandoned it, I wouldn't be suprised if they still have it in their system

as for the morons going "sending bills for not paying bills won't work" what the hell do you think impounding their car does?

This is why it works

Instead of impounding the car and arresting the person making them a huge burden on the state, you impound the car only so they can still work and pay the original and new fines to get their car back. That or the car get's auctioned off and the fines are paid with that.

Jesus how hard is that to understand.

If you don't pay your fines, you can't renew your registration, if your registration is expired, your car gets impounded, there is no way out of paying your fines unless you have an inexhaustible supply of cars.

RoyBatty:Dog Man: RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Tell me how you secure a house that has been decimated by a wildfire anyway...

Exactly, which is why carting her off immediately is such an asinine power play.

It's not a "power play." You're intentionally choosing to see this as something that it isn't. Police officers have an obligation to arrest someone who has an active warrant issued by the court. There is no leeway. We have to arrest.

On top of that, every name and tag you run is logged on the computer. We are subject to audit from the state and federal agencies that provide us with state and NCIC access. They can audit those records and we have to explain why we decided to violate a court order and let someone with a warrant go.

I think I do understand to some extent the truly difficult position you would be in. With judge and pension on one side, and newly homeless individual on the other it's pretty clear you're up against (a rock and a hard place) versus a newly homeless individual with no power.

That said, I've certainly read of incidents where it's been handled better than immediately carting off the victim of the fire.

So when I say, how do you secure her belongings, one answer might be, call the sergeant and her relatives/friends and give her a couple of hours or half a day with a cop onsite. Then he/or she is released as quickly as possible and brought back.

Or call the judge or a different judge and ask for a waiver.

Or call the Red Cross and see if they can rustle up some volunteers.

And no, I don't know how realistic any of that is in *your town*, but where I want to live, cops use discretion, prosecutors use discretion, and newly homeless victims of fire aren't arrested over a ticket and taken away from the ruins of their home.

It's a wildfire, you really think the red cross and hundreds of volunteers weren't already onsite.

It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail for their own poor deicion. There are legitimate emergencies and police work to be done, not babysitting rubble.

Again, it's not the job of the police to secure her residence after an act of god. Period.

HideAndGoFarkYourself:It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail for their own poor deicion. There are legitimate emergencies and police work to be done, not babysitting rubble.

Again, it's not the job of the police to secure her residence after an act of god. Period.

As I said before, that's fine, just don't wonder why the plebeians hate you. You have a shiatty attitude.

barc0001:What the hell is it with the US and their fetish to lock people up for anything possible? I don't know if it's even POSSIBLE to be arrested in Canada for an outstanding traffic ticket, I sure has hell have never heard of it happening.

She was arrested for failing to appear in court, not the traffic violation itself.

Shan:Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: People have to "take their car in" for registration where you live? Here in FL it's all done on-line.

Most states I've lived in you can do a renewal on-line; by mail, or by wasting your day at the DMV / DoT; unless it's an out-of-state transfer or "new" registration (like you bought it used from someone), then it (usually) has to be done in person so a clerk can verify the VIN and odometer.

In nova Scotia, failing to show up is an automatic conviction, a letter to your insurance company who will raise your rates, and the inability to renew your drivers license or permit, followed up with referral to a collection agency which appears on your credit report, and possible tax or wage garnishing by the CRA (IRS equivalent ) They WILL Get your money. Oh, and an automatic week long suspension for any speeding infraction. But no jail time.

HideAndGoFarkYourself:RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: I have little sympathy. On one hand, it sucks about her house. But one had nothing to do with the other.

If I stop a person and it's an extraditable warrant, I'm required by our department policy to arrest that person, unless they have a medical condition which would prevent them from safely making it to the jail. So, unless the person is having a heart attack, they go to jail.

Her hard luck story about her house being destroyed isn't worth me losing my career and livelihood over.

The department policy is an ass. Don't be an ass yourself.

People sifting through the remains of their homes have more pressing issues than sucking your dick over a misdemeanor traffic warrant. After you arrest her, are you going to back and secure her belongings and make sure no one rips them off?

Classy.

I don't make the policies, and whether or not I agree with them, I'm required to abide by them. She could have easily avoided having a warrant out for her arrest by taking care of whatever the charge was that caused the warrant to be issued in the first place.

Like I said, and like I'll stand by, it's not worth losing my career over, so she would have gone to jail.

"I was just following orders" didn't work at Nuremberg, asshole. You'll get yours at the day of reckoning.

RoyBatty:HideAndGoFarkYourself: It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail for their own poor deicion. There are legitimate emergencies and police work to be done, not babysitting rubble.

Again, it's not the job of the police to secure her residence after an act of god. Period.

As I said before, that's fine, just don't wonder why the plebeians hate you. You have a shiatty attitude.

Yes, he should be out arresting mayors who drive drunk instead of letting them go, as I noted above. Cops exercising discretion is great when they're exercising it for people we think they should be letting off the hook; but not so great when they're exercising it for people we think should be doing extra time for being entitled douchebags, amirite?

But when rabble-rousers like me dare point this out, suddenly I'M the bad person for wondering why we have this contradictory attitude towards our law enforcement personnel.

Gyrfalcon:RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail for their own poor deicion. There are legitimate emergencies and police work to be done, not babysitting rubble.

Again, it's not the job of the police to secure her residence after an act of god. Period.

As I said before, that's fine, just don't wonder why the plebeians hate you. You have a shiatty attitude.

Yes, he should be out arresting mayors who drive drunk instead of letting them go, as I noted above. Cops exercising discretion is great when they're exercising it for people we think they should be letting off the hook; but not so great when they're exercising it for people we think should be doing extra time for being entitled douchebags, amirite?

But when rabble-rousers like me dare point this out, suddenly I'M the bad person for wondering why we have this contradictory attitude towards our law enforcement personnel.

Hey I never said you were a bad person, just that you are drawn badly.

But I do think discretion is discretion, it doesn't let people off the hook due to power, poverty, etc., it looks at the circumstances and the severity and the victims and the restitution.

It should be applied to everyone evenly with some exceptions, mainly by being stricter on public and corporate officials, mainly because they will be well represented by lawyers.

RoyBatty:Gyrfalcon: RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail for their own poor deicion. There are legitimate emergencies and police work to be done, not babysitting rubble.

Again, it's not the job of the police to secure her residence after an act of god. Period.

As I said before, that's fine, just don't wonder why the plebeians hate you. You have a shiatty attitude.

Yes, he should be out arresting mayors who drive drunk instead of letting them go, as I noted above. Cops exercising discretion is great when they're exercising it for people we think they should be letting off the hook; but not so great when they're exercising it for people we think should be doing extra time for being entitled douchebags, amirite?

But when rabble-rousers like me dare point this out, suddenly I'M the bad person for wondering why we have this contradictory attitude towards our law enforcement personnel.

Hey I never said you were a bad person, just that you are drawn badly. [i.imgur.com image 287x145]

But I do think discretion is discretion, it doesn't let people off the hook due to power, poverty, etc., it looks at the circumstances and the severity and the victims and the restitution.

It should be applied to everyone evenly with some exceptions, mainly by being stricter on public and corporate officials, mainly because they will be well represented by lawyers.

ThatGuyGreg:Yeah, shiatty timing, but maybe she should pay that ticket or show up to fight it next time, hmmm?

No sympathy for those that break the rules eh? Well, neither does law enforcement. We should all remember that when we want more laws and tougher rules and sentences for more common infractions. They don't care about anything BUT the rules, so don't ask them to enforce bad ones.

I dislike how the easy, lazy path for law and officials and clerks and judges is just to fine people, increase the fines, imprison over very little and just stomp people out.

It may be paranoia, I feel as though I am walking on eggshells in society today, one misstep and the eye of the Internet is shined on me, and the holy wrath of society. Worse, no one is there to see and it's just the shallow everyday drudge work of a few bureaucrats invisibly, silently hammering the nails down.

The My Little Pony Killer:Yes, keep sending her bills that she's going to keep just not paying. That'll learn her a thing or two.

Oh, but putting someone in jail for being poor is IMMINENTLY preferable, in your estimation. Dumbass. She's costing the taxpayers money sitting in jail, and since her home just burned down with everything she owned inside and she had no insurance, I don't think she's going to be paying her fine anytime real soon.

95BV5:HideAndGoFarkYourself: RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: I have little sympathy. On one hand, it sucks about her house. But one had nothing to do with the other.

If I stop a person and it's an extraditable warrant, I'm required by our department policy to arrest that person, unless they have a medical condition which would prevent them from safely making it to the jail. So, unless the person is having a heart attack, they go to jail.

Her hard luck story about her house being destroyed isn't worth me losing my career and livelihood over.

The department policy is an ass. Don't be an ass yourself.

People sifting through the remains of their homes have more pressing issues than sucking your dick over a misdemeanor traffic warrant. After you arrest her, are you going to back and secure her belongings and make sure no one rips them off?

Classy.

I don't make the policies, and whether or not I agree with them, I'm required to abide by them. She could have easily avoided having a warrant out for her arrest by taking care of whatever the charge was that caused the warrant to be issued in the first place.

Like I said, and like I'll stand by, it's not worth losing my career over, so she would have gone to jail.

"I was just following orders" didn't work at Nuremberg, asshole. You'll get yours at the day of reckoning.

Riiiiight, because being commanded by a judge to arrest a person after he's carefully reviewed the relveant documentation is the same as gassing millions of people and engaging in mass genocide.

RoyBatty:HideAndGoFarkYourself: It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail for their own poor deicion. There are legitimate emergencies and police work to be done, not babysitting rubble.

Again, it's not the job of the police to secure her residence after an act of god. Period.

As I said before, that's fine, just don't wonder why the plebeians hate you. You have a shiatty attitude.

No, my attitude is perfectly fine. Yours needs some work though. You fail to understand that the officer may not have had a choice in the matter, as I've pointed out. When i run a person's name on my computer, if they have a warrant, it sends an alert to the dispatch center, who then asks if the hit is accurate. If I lie, I lose my credibility, and quite possibly my job. If I tell them the truth, then my supervisors are going to be expecting me to log a person in custody and start transporting to jail. The only exception is if they're in need of life saving treatment.

There are things I'm willing to lose my job for. I've mentioned those things in discussions on this very page many, many times. A heartbreaking story about a person losing their trailer to a wildfire isn't one fo them. Yes, it's horrible. She would not have gone to jail if she didn't fail to appear. To have a failure to appear warrant, she'd have to have had notice of the court date, be it on a citation, or a summons to appear. SHE chose not to show up.

The wildfire isn't the fault of the police, ergo, they're not required to sit outside (as you suggest) to "secure her property."

I'd guess the "plebians" that you keep referring to would rather the police not babysit a pile of rubble, but instead be out doing other more important jobs.

HideAndGoFarkYourself:RoyBatty: Dog Man: RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Tell me how you secure a house that has been decimated by a wildfire anyway...

Exactly, which is why carting her off immediately is such an asinine power play.

It's not a "power play." You're intentionally choosing to see this as something that it isn't. Police officers have an obligation to arrest someone who has an active warrant issued by the court. There is no leeway. We have to arrest.

On top of that, every name and tag you run is logged on the computer. We are subject to audit from the state and federal agencies that provide us with state and NCIC access. They can audit those records and we have to explain why we decided to violate a court order and let someone with a warrant go.

I think I do understand to some extent the truly difficult position you would be in. With judge and pension on one side, and newly homeless individual on the other it's pretty clear you're up against (a rock and a hard place) versus a newly homeless individual with no power.

That said, I've certainly read of incidents where it's been handled better than immediately carting off the victim of the fire.

So when I say, how do you secure her belongings, one answer might be, call the sergeant and her relatives/friends and give her a couple of hours or half a day with a cop onsite. Then he/or she is released as quickly as possible and brought back.

Or call the judge or a different judge and ask for a waiver.

Or call the Red Cross and see if they can rustle up some volunteers.

And no, I don't know how realistic any of that is in *your town*, but where I want to live, cops use discretion, prosecutors use discretion, and newly homeless victims of fire aren't arrested over a ticket and taken away from the ruins of their home.

It's a wildfire, you really think the red cross and hundreds of volunteers weren't already onsite.

It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail for their own poor deicion. There are legitimate emergencies and police work to be done, not babysitting rubble.

Again, it's not the job of the police to secure her residence after an act of god. Period.

You are SUCH a dick.. Tell me, is that why you were attracted to the job, or is it that years of being a cop have turned you that way? I'm guessing the former...

HideAndGoFarkYourself:RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail for their own poor deicion. There are legitimate emergencies and police work to be done, not babysitting rubble.

Again, it's not the job of the police to secure her residence after an act of god. Period.

As I said before, that's fine, just don't wonder why the plebeians hate you. You have a shiatty attitude.

No, my attitude is perfectly fine. Yours needs some work though. You fail to understand that the officer may not have had a choice in the matter, as I've pointed out. When i run a person's name on my computer, if they have a warrant, it sends an alert to the dispatch center, who then asks if the hit is accurate. If I lie, I lose my credibility, and quite possibly my job. If I tell them the truth, then my supervisors are going to be expecting me to log a person in custody and start transporting to jail. The only exception is if they're in need of life saving treatment.

There are things I'm willing to lose my job for. I've mentioned those things in discussions on this very page many, many times. A heartbreaking story about a person losing their trailer to a wildfire isn't one fo them. Yes, it's horrible. She would not have gone to jail if she didn't fail to appear. To have a failure to appear warrant, she'd have to have had notice of the court date, be it on a citation, or a summons to appear. SHE chose not to show up.

The wildfire isn't the fault of the police, ergo, they're not required to sit outside (as you suggest) to "secure her property."

I'd guess the "plebians" that you keep referring to would rather the police not babysit a pile of rubble, but instead be out doing other more important jobs.

dopekitty74:HideAndGoFarkYourself: RoyBatty: Dog Man: RoyBatty: HideAndGoFarkYourself: Tell me how you secure a house that has been decimated by a wildfire anyway...

Exactly, which is why carting her off immediately is such an asinine power play.

It's not a "power play." You're intentionally choosing to see this as something that it isn't. Police officers have an obligation to arrest someone who has an active warrant issued by the court. There is no leeway. We have to arrest.

On top of that, every name and tag you run is logged on the computer. We are subject to audit from the state and federal agencies that provide us with state and NCIC access. They can audit those records and we have to explain why we decided to violate a court order and let someone with a warrant go.

I think I do understand to some extent the truly difficult position you would be in. With judge and pension on one side, and newly homeless individual on the other it's pretty clear you're up against (a rock and a hard place) versus a newly homeless individual with no power.

That said, I've certainly read of incidents where it's been handled better than immediately carting off the victim of the fire.

So when I say, how do you secure her belongings, one answer might be, call the sergeant and her relatives/friends and give her a couple of hours or half a day with a cop onsite. Then he/or she is released as quickly as possible and brought back.

Or call the judge or a different judge and ask for a waiver.

Or call the Red Cross and see if they can rustle up some volunteers.

And no, I don't know how realistic any of that is in *your town*, but where I want to live, cops use discretion, prosecutors use discretion, and newly homeless victims of fire aren't arrested over a ticket and taken away from the ruins of their home.

It's a wildfire, you really think the red cross and hundreds of volunteers weren't already onsite.

It's not my job to sit around outside somebody's burnt out house while they're in jail fo ...

I'm a dick for pointing out the obvious? SHE made the decision not to show up to her court date. It's not like she wasn't notified of it. She willingly didn't show up. Is it sad that her house burnt down? Yes.

If I'd watched her sifting through the rubble and doing something illegal, like drive on a suspended license to go get food or something at the store, I wouldn't dream of arresting her for it.

Like I said, I DO NOT have a choice when it comes to warrants. Period. I am mandated to arrest that person. I am commanded by a judge to do it, and I have to do it. The argument about "what are you going to do to secure her home" is nonsense, as it's not an issue. Her home was destroyed, first of all. Secondly, we have no obligation to secure a persons property after an act of god. None. Would it be nice if we could, yes, it would be. If that was the case, that's all the police and fire personnel in Oklahoma would STILL be doing. It's just not feasible. If the police had forced their way into the house and caused damage themselves, they'd be responsible for securing the property. Otherwise, we're not.

You don't like it, fine. I don't care. I'm not willing to lose my job over that. If I was ordered to violate rights, i'd walk away from the job and never look back. But losing my job for overlooking a warrant? Not going to happen, and NONE of you would be willing to lose your jobs for it too. You might say you would be to try to paint me as a dick, but when it came down to it, you wouldn't.